The Instigator
p33kab0o
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
blarson
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

The United States should lift it's economic embargo on Cuba as opposed to the status quo

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
blarson
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/31/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 301 times Debate No: 51337
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

p33kab0o

Pro

The United States economic embargo on Cuba is one of the biggest foreign policy failures in American history. After almost 5 decades, the Cuban government has not changed. Today, Cuba has healthy relations with almost every country except the US. The world sees the US as stubborn and unwilling to compromise.
blarson

Con

I will gladly accept the role of the negation.
Seeing as my opponent did not go into much depth, I am assuming round 1 is just formalities. I shall post a case in its entirity for round 2, for sake of fairness.

As an overview, my two arguments will be as follows

1. Hegemony
- The US taking a firm stance against polarized regimes legitimizes the United State's image globally
- Human rights violations still committed today in Cuba would be unintentionally condoned by this action

2. Keystone XL
-The Republicans lack the political capital to pass the Keystone XL legislation
- Dissent caused by this massive policy reversal would allow Republicans to rally support in the midterms
-This enables them to pass Keystone XL, which has a multitude of harms I will go into depth on later
Debate Round No. 1
p33kab0o

Pro

p33kab0o forfeited this round.
blarson

Con

blarson forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
p33kab0o

Pro

p33kab0o forfeited this round.
blarson

Con

blarson forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
p33kab0oblarsonTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Don't really find his arguments to be all that good, but they don't have to be when Pro's sole argument is that there is no effect of this policy on changing mentalities. That's solely mitigation, whereas there's some actual offense in Con's argumentation, even if his second contention has an absolutely baffling link story and both lack impacts. Both sides forfeited the same number of rounds, so conduct goes to no one.